On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 9:22 AM, Martin Albrecht wrote:
>
>> >> sage: axiom(maxima('1/2'))
>> >> 1
>> >> -
>> >> 2
>> >> sage: maxima(axiom('1/2'))
>> >> -1
>> > The only reason these examples work is by chance. The current
>> > code was not designed to work this way, and this approach would
>>
> >> sage: axiom(maxima('1/2'))
> >> 1
> >> -
> >> 2
> >> sage: maxima(axiom('1/2'))
> >> -1
> > The only reason these examples work is by chance. The current
> > code was not designed to work this way, and this approach would
> > only work in general for the simplest of examples (such as inte
On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 12:40 AM, Mike Hansen wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
>> I think it is not so bad since by defining the function float
>> appropriately this can easily parse this into a Sage floating point.
>> If this really is inconvenient then the
>>
>>> The linear representation of the object is muc
Hello,
> I think it is not so bad since by defining the function float
> appropriately this can easily parse this into a Sage floating point.
> If this really is inconvenient then the
>
>> The linear representation of the object is much less important
>> than it being human readable.
>>
>
> -1 No
